truth for its own sake, regardless of its more unpleasant implications ...

July 2010

July 25, 2010

i am gone for a bit, no submissions for a bit, so go to http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.comto see what is going on in the world in terms of politics and the anti-jihad. for my own part, i seek a little inner salvation w/ friends in montana.

so, while others are out and about, i am seeking "the holy grail" of guitar playing, the transition from bad to mediocre.

i am taking my curtis mayfield guitar book, he of the five-flats and the five-sharps key signatures, i am learning "people get ready" and "gypsy woman," and i am gonna do it watching the elk & the deer & the wild turkeys & the squirrels wander by in the windows, no doubt enthralled by my halt scratchings: who knows, maybe i will make the transition to turkey calls on my little gibson. maybe i won't.

i am not gonna write. i am gonna do my damn level best not to even think of any of this. i am gonna sleep in, have breakfast late, and eat too much. you can take care of the world on your own without my little contributions, for a bit, eh? you can do that much for me, yes?

i am gonna think of my pal at atlas shrugs, and i am gonna give thanks that she is here every day carrying the load, and that she is thinking and writing of such matters. she serves you all, so ably. so, i am gonna end this just like i started it, with a link to the best blog in america, run by the best blogger, the most important conservative blogger in america. she does more than just blather. she is an activist, in the truest sense, advancing our cause as americans, and as conservatives. so, go, here, everyday. i do. http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com.

“1. It is said of the race of Gaul, that there be not a man of spine among them, for in wars do they prove duplicitous and cowardly allies and in peace do they duplicitously wage war in secret upon their friends.

2. Now it came to pass, in the span of two and one half score years, that the men of Gaul did invite their former vassals to live in peace in their midst. And they were called 'guest workers'.

3. And their vassals were the Algerian and the Moor, who are the sons of Allah and his prophet,

[a quite lovely illustration omitted,

because it played havor w/ my word processor:jjay.]

...who is now and evermore the clyster bag of Satan.

4. In the course of time, after many generations of guest workers had been born, the men of Gaul did look around and behold a terrible and wondrous thing.… .”

it seems that the ancient parables of the good book become the contemporary parables of the book of jau jau, and ancient truths are modern truths, and that a clyster bag is a clyster bag, of any age.

and, that islam continues to bring its very peculiar "blessings" wherever it may go, ... , and, transgress, and profane, and pollute, ... , and wherever it may bring its peculiar, whiny, fawning, posturing and obsequious, backstabbing violence and evil. what a despicable religion, and what despicable people. for centuries before, and seemingly, for centuries before us, to infinity and beyond. (thank you buzz lightyear, for a very descriptive phrase.)

the hostess cupcake doth wield a sharp pen, and arms us all, with sharp swords, of the most prickly kind & variety.

the blasphemous book, always, worth an extended stay and contemplative read. go there, and read, and laugh and think, and gaze upon the marvelous art work and graphics to be found.

July 20, 2010

..., "you must remember, at some point the romans became the italians." professor robert harbold was one of my poli sci professors in college, and he labored mightily to dent my resistance to formal education, and the receipt of learning. well, he may have made more of an impression on me than he dreamt. but, i certainly had no idea it would take 40 years for it to take effect, and i expect that he was probably more optimistic, too. all things considered, however, he would have said better late! than never!, ... . (:O }}}}

but, let me digress, just a bit.--

you remember in the old "i love lucy show," when dezi arnez as rickey ricardo would say to lucille ball, "lucy, ... , you got some 'eh's'plainin' to do," after one of her harebrained schemes went ludicrously awry? and lucy would contritely "'eh's'plain" why it was she did something.

well, let me "eh's'plain." just what i think professor harbold meant by that. and, we will once again have recourse to angelo m. codevilla's great essay, "america's ruling class and the perils of revolution." in this seminal essay, codevilla describes a ruling class made formidable by its networking, and focused supremely on seizing control of the institutions of power in our society, to better perpetuate its rule. in so doing, as the good little leftists that they are, they have surrendered all vestiges of allegiance to the great myths of the "bourgeoisie," and have embraced power and perpetuation of rule as their ethic. given this penetrating analysis, none of us should be even remotely surprised by the spectacle of s.e.i.u. and black panther thugs patrolling the voting booth to intimidate voters from expressing their conscious.

now, the following is not non sequitur. it is about as sequitur as you can get.

there is no accident in the history of the roman empire lasting for centuries. the romans were fastidiously pious in the observance of civic virtue, and the romans were disciplined, rigorous, moral and ethical in spite of what you may think of them. virtues such as piety, courage, honor, integrity, honesty, rectitude were valued, and rigorously adhered to.

for centuries. and, then they weren't. and gave way to expediency, and lust for power and wealth. and, when the ancient virtues gave way, so did the romans. they became italians.

this is what professor harbold meant by his observation, and, so understood, it became excoriation and not witticism. the italians, in the good professor's opinion, lacked virtue and courage.

it has engaged in criticizing and attacking the virtues that formally characterized the american experience, to the point where it is confident enough now to openly ridicule those virtues, and to scoff and ridicule those who adhere to them. it openly despises the rule of law that characterized two centuries of unparalleled progress and social advancement.

such is its strength. it knows no constraints. observes no rules.

and, as a consequence, it believes in nothing. except its right to rule.

it is ruthless.

and, believing nothing, this is its fatal weakness, the seeds to its downfall.

it knows no virtue. its despises courage, service and sacrifice. it knows nothing of rigor, it knows nothing of discipline, it ridicules the notion that values and beliefs and convictions are worth dying for. it extols nothing except raw pleasure, and spurns love and devotion as something for chumps. it scorns the love of a man for a woman, a woman for a man, and the love of parents for children as found in marriage.

it delegates the exercise of the thuggery done in behalf of state rule to minions who perform there duty for financial reward, comfort and status.

it does not function by belief and loyalty, but by reward.

and, divorced as it is from the beliefs and loyalty of those over who it presides, it can expect no succor from its subjects if attacked. and, in fact, the likely source of attack upon our ruling italian elites, ... ,as cynical and world weary as any italian ever portrayed in "catch 22" ever thought of being, ... , comes precisely from us, as janet napolitano so rightfully fears.

friends, the elite ruling this country has no friends. as charles durning says to his idiot son in in "oh, brother, where art thou," we need a constituency. the elites ruling this country do so uneasily, and uneasily lie the heads of tyrants, because they know that they are despised by us.

america's ruling elite has no protectors among us. the u.s. military despises obama and his minions and his leftist professors and the hollywood scum who consort with hugo chavez and his like. this is why obama wants to create a police force equal to our military, to serve him, and to repress us.

and, the ruling elite has been so effective in destroying the values it hates in us, amongst its own, that it has no protectors from its own who are willing to sacrifice themselves. the left in america has been just as effective as the left in europe in producing generation upon generation of adherents who believe in nothing, who serve nothing, and who will sacrifice themselves for nothing. they will not do it for positive virtues such as courage, integrity and honor, and they sure as hell will not do it for expediency.

this is the trouble with people who scoff and believe in nothing. neither do they believe in themselves.

and, this is why they are vulnerable, despite the overwhelming control they have over the institutions of power, in the government, in the unions, in academia, and amongst the oligarchs of commerce.

they are nihilists. they may join the fight initially to preserve their prestige and power and wealth. but, they have no stomach for protracted conflict with us, just as they have no stomach for protracted conflict with the taliban.

al queda and taliban know this. they is why they "negotiate" with our ruling elites through propaganda and international conference, knowing they cannot defeat our military. why would they do it any differently, with the great example of the viet nam capitulation before them.

friends, get this through your heads.--

if they have no stomach for such things on foreign soil, when it is us they sacrifice, and we are to them no more than a better smelling peasantry, ... , then think of how little stomach for such things they will have in conflict upon our home ground, when it is they who are called upon to sacrifice (and they will not, as they do not believe in such matters), when it is they who die at the hands of the peasantry.

i invite anyone who disagrees with this analysis to consider otherwise.

it is linked at gmsplace, a blog run by friend george m. roper.it is also linked at the july 19, 2010 issue of instapundit.

“america’s ruling class—and the perils of revolution” is a brilliant essay describing and explaining the origins of america’s ruling elites and the things which they believe, and why those beliefs are diametrically apposite of most of the ideals you and i cherish.the essay explains how the ruling classes have become entrenched in, do in fact constitute, america’s governmental bureaucracy and academia.

and, it explains how the democratic party has become the vehicle of this class, and exerts its power by patronage and dolling out the spoils of the ruling classes dominance.this is not so surprising, as all ruling classes have done the same.but, this article explains why this particular ruling class is so inimical to your values, and why it threatens their very existence and preservation.

and, why it threatens our very existence.

if you are to understand anything of this, you must read this essay.or, you don’t have to if you don’t want to.just don’t blame angelo m. codevilla for your “discomfort” as you are being ground into meal by the treads of an armored personnel carrier.

my little introductory essay: you may skip it it you want.that’s why I put the links up front.

many years ago, and several lives, i was an up & coming young politico, and the general consensus was that i could make a successful career of it.i ran with a group to include a fellow named jim waldo, a one-time gubernatorial candidate in the republican party, and stewart elway, now washingtonstate’s preeminent political pollster.i watched a gubernatorial election return, tagging along w/ jim waldo, at the washington athletic club with governor dan evan’s staffers, who had escorted him once again into office.i worked with former g.o.p. chairman c. montgomery johnson on a referendum campaign called “washington futures”, which to this day contributes to capital expenditures on various things in washington state.

i was president of the college young republicans, on the same campus as contributed ryan crocker to the state department and sally mathiasen to foggy bottom as well.

i had pretty free run of the secretary of state’s office, and the governor’s office, and even pooped in the governor’s toilet on an after hours lark w/ friends through the capital building.i missed going up to the dome and looking at olympia and environs only because of some scheduling omission or another, probably drinking beer instead.it would have been fun, the washington capital building is still, it seems ot me, the world’s 4th largest single dome building.

and, then a “perception” or “realization,” if you will, derailed all that.and, a resultant & probably the most ethics bound decision i ever made, stepped in.

no, it wasn’t the realization that most politicians are assholes, driven mostly by ambition.and, in this perception i exclude the people named, as they were and are, to a man and woman, people who are not in the general run of the mill of the political class.they are fine people, and they have retained their humanity and ideals.

no, the realization was that as a person, i did not possess their virtues, and that if i got into politics as a profession or if i sought and obtained elective office, there was not the quality within me that could successfully resist becoming the same asshole as those whom i despised.

i knew it would change me.no, it was not that i was sexually deviant like bill clinton, or even that i was corruptible to the interests of power like hillary clinton.it was just that i perceived, and with some certain accuracy, that i would become an asshole like the majority of the political classes, … , egocentric, and oblivious to reality, and ultimately, just crass.

but, i have always retained an interest in politics (hey, i was a poli sci major, receiving my b.a. in 1971 for same), and its workings, and especially the structure of rule.

so, it was with some interest that i read the following post, and linked post at george roper’s shop this morning.this essay explains the growing chasm of the divide between we the people and those who deign to “rule” us.the essay is brilliant in its scope, and just about flawless in its execution.in my estimation.

let me just say, that it is the most accurate analysis of what ails this country in terms of its political leadership as i have ever read. and, why we must excise this elite from our governance, if we are to maintain our own governance from among our own fellows: you want to be a serf, then keep your head up your butt, and you probably won't even notice.

it is not just because it accurately depicts america’s ruling class as smug, self satisfied, ideological assholes, but it discusses why they are so removed from the rest of us in terms of their assumptions about what proper governance of the country should constitute.

the author of the article linked by george makes the telling observation that this particular group of assholes is largely estranged from us, and exists as a ruling class of foreigners, as surely as though they were french aristocrats.which status, i suspect, most of them aspire to.

while in college i had the distinct privilege to be mentored by a history professor name of fred breit, a graduate of the university of chicago.he taught russian history, and 20th century history, whose dominant themes are dictated by the soviet communist version of total rule, or, totalitarianism, if you wish to gussy it up.in the 19th century, as the socialists were giving expression to their fledging desire to govern, some of them thought it would be nice to become “one” with the downtrodden peasant class.so, they determined that they would learn “russian” as a language, and dress as peasants, and mix with the under classes, so better to “understand” and “be one” with them.

so, they dressed as they imagine peasants dressed.

and so, they spoke as they imagine peasants spoke.

and, in muscovy and petersburg, they “mixed” with them, and went about and “mingled.”

much to the terror of the peasants, and the kulaks, and the russian merchants, who thought they were being occupied by cossacks and mongols.

so much for “solidarity” with the peeps.

i think of these things, whenever janet napolitano utters one of her infamous lines about right wing extremist terrorists, in the forms of our mothers, fathers, grandpa’s and grandma’s in attendance at tea parties.

this divide we suffer between ourselves and our rulers, as described in the link posted at george’s shop, is not less profound than the divide existing between the russian population and the socialists and communists who came to “lead” them after the soviet revolution of 1917.and, I think this divide, if allowed to perpetuate itself in the institutions of our government, shall lead to the same tragedy as befell soviet russia when the revolution “solidified” its hold on institutional power.

we have lots of basements in this country, and lots of people who dream of placing a 9mm pill right behind our collective ears, if only someone will hold us tight for the marksman.

read “smolensk under soviet rule” by merle fainsod, for some elucidation on this point.

thank you, fred breit, for what you taught me.than you, oh heavenly father and host of hosts, for the grant of your insights, as well.

in short, i decided that i did not want to become those persons, that foreign people, described in angelo m. codevilla’s essays, those foreigners who preside over us as an occupying army.they do not rule from having come from among us, they rule as occupiers, they rule by conquest.if you understand this, you understand the role of blank panthers and the s.i.e.u. at polling places, and you understand how the left intends to maintain its rule.

you have taken the first rudimentary step towards recognizing what you must do.

john jay @ 07.19.2010

p.s.and, this final observation.“you realize, of course, that this means war? …” if we are to preserve those rights and liberties which the ruling classes mean to usurp, to swallow whole and destroy as they work to “perfect” us into their image.

friends, if you wish to retain and preserve individual virtue, you are going to have to kill in order to do so.

if we are to excise the ruling class, it will be with violence.they used violence to attain their privilege, they use it nakedly in the form of the s.i.e.u. and black panther thugs in elective politics to maintain it, they contemplate relocation camps to preserve it, and they will violently resist and suppress any and all efforts to be removed from their privilege.

buy guns.buy ammo.be jealous of your liberties.and, understand, you are going to have to kill folks, your uncles, your sons and daughters, to preserve those liberties.

July 18, 2010

correction: the incident described below took place at gateway international raceway, near st. louis, missouri, on saturday, 07.17.2010, and not in atlanta as noted below. i must have gotten it confused with an earlier incident in which edwards also spun keselowski near the end of a race. i was humored to read another account of the incident in which the writer said edwards "nudged" keselowski, which is sorta like saying that pretty boy floyd made unauthorized withdrawals from banks. edwards drove into the rear of keselowski's car, and stayed there to push him into a broadside skid, in about as deliberate a move as can be made on a racetrack. i may not know my ass from a hole in the ground as to where race tracks are located, but i know enough to know when a driver wrecks another one on purpose. and, when it is a chickenshit thing to do. i stand by every other opinion expressed below.

at the end of a "nation wide" race in atlanta yesterday (saturday, 07.17.2010), carl edwards pulled one of most chicken shit stunts i have ever seen in a stock car race. coming out of the final corner, he simply spun brad keselowski (by driving into his right rear quarter panel and forcing it sideways) who had position on him, driving past keselowski to steal the win.

keselowski spun down to the inside of the track in front of a whole host of race cars traveling at speed, and was struck broadside on the driver's side of the car by a driver who simply had no chance to avoid the collision. keselowski was pushed sideways across the finish line, in 14th position in a race he should have won.

edwards was hardly contrite. in a post-race interview, he admitted the spin maneuver, and said he simply would not allow keselowki to "take the race from him."

we, not only is edwards chicken shit because he steals races he cannot win, but he is a son of a bitch because he could have killed keselowski. and, he is a lying, delusional son of a bitch to boot.

earlier in that same final lap, while in the lead, edwards got high on the race track and up in the middle grove, and allowed keselowski to drive under him and deeper into the turn, and the cars bumped, and keselowski drove past him to take the lead he never surrendered to racing, the lead that he surrendered only to a cheater who wrecked him. what keselowski did to him, by the way, is the classic passing maneuver of a driver in pursuit who has out driven the driver in front of him.

carl edwards just figures that if he cannot out drive a competitor that it is just o.k. if he wrecks them, in order that he may win. he is an arrogant pup.

let's go back to the start of the last lap and the contact between edwards and keselowski that occurred there.--

first off, edwards took a high grove into the turn, driving in the middle of the track, and literally invited keselowski, or any one else who might have been following to pass him on the low side by going into the turn deeper, and lower. i have watched this sequence about five times, and it appears to me that edwards after being out driven and out strategized, refused to allow keselowski a clean pass, and rather than ceding the race track that rightfully belong to the younger driver, he turned in and drove down on keselowski.

that is when they rubbed. they rubbed because edwards would not cede the ground he should have ceded because of his bad driving. now, in racing, it is time honored to block, and it is time honored to shut the door on a quicker opponent, and deny them the superior line they have earned by being quicker and smarter. no one expects anyone to give up the lead with fighting to protect it.

but, when someone passes you on the low side, and they have made the pass for all intents and purposes and they are maintaining greater speed (a sign of skill in corners, a skill carl edwards obviously does not possess), then it is proper racing to give the superior driver the line he has earned by superior craft and driving. in short, carl edwards is blaming the other driver, keselowski, for his own lack of sufficient skill to protect his track position, and he figures if he (edwards) is incompetent, it is o.k. for him to wreck the other driver to compensate for his (edwards's) lack of skill. this is why edwards is not only a liar, but a delusional liar.

carl edwards did not concede the track position to the driver who earned it simply by driving better than he. instead, he turned down onto keselowski, and tried to bump keselowski down onto the apron and the grass. it looks to me like he initiated the contact, and i think that he is a chickenshit lying son of a bitch to accuse keselowski of being the "[true] aggressor" in the incident in which he (edwards) deliberately wrecked him (keselowski), at speed, knowing that he would be caught up in accidents at the finish line as other competitors pursued them at full speed.

chickenshit. lying. son of a bitch.

that's carl edwards, nascar race driver.

nascar is a very rough sport. and, edwards will get his pay backs. and, from what i understand of keselowski, he is going to be just the one to do it. you'll notice i have not said keselowski is a very nice guy, or angelic, nor would i hide that bad blood goes back between them: they have each wrecked the other before. race car driving is not for naifs and innocents, they are rough people who engage in this very rough sports. if any of they go to hell, if won't be for singing out of key in church choir.

there are no "innocents" in this sport. but, in this instance, keselowski simply out drove edwards any number of ways, to be wrecked within seconds of the finish line by edwards deliberately spinning him out in front of a full line of cars pursuing at full speed.

p.s. keselowski's dad was livid. he said edwards tried to kill his son with this maneuver. i do not believe that keselowski pater's characterization of edwards' driving to have been inapt. edwards appears the larger, stronger, older and certainly the more aggressive. were i keselowski, i would take an axe handle to edwards, and never loose a second's sleep over it. were i keselowski. and, were this not the summer assize.

July 17, 2010

it appears to be a summary of stanley mcchrystal's service jacket, which serves as a fairly good biography of an extremely successful military career.

i don't know where it came from, or who compiled it, and the email gave absolutely no attribution as to authorship.

and, i have not run it by "snopes." i will take the risk.

but, it makes a pretty good point. by the time someone has attained the rank of a stanley mcchrystal, they have "done" much and attained "much," and they have learned "much" about men and command and service.

this could be any general grade officer in the u.s. military. furthermore, to get to this sort of rank, a person is subject to rigorous "peer" review, and exceedingly rigorous performance evaluation, and there are no secrets. stanley mcchrystal belongs to a fraternity of men who have known each other their life long, and from whom absolute candor, honesty and truth are demanded. their absolute bond is honor.

they have served in and protected each other in combat.

we know where they were born. we know who backs them. we know what they believe.

and, then there is barack obama, a pretender, and a man of whom it can be said only that he has hidden who he is, what he is, and will not speak directly as to where he was born. and, who has spent millions in legal defense to hide these things.

please read this through to the end. this was sent to me by friend matt guderjohn from yakima, washington. a man who has served his country in wartime in the united states marine corps. a good man.

i know this of matt guderjohn.

as between mcchrystal and obama, i know who i would follow into combat and who i wouldn't, and who i would trust to lead me and who i wouldn't. our country still produces men like stanley mcchrystal.

how in g_d's name did we elect the charlatan obama to be president of the united states?

July 16, 2010

she links at the blasphemous book of the jau jau an article appearing at "sultan knish" by daniel greenfield entitled, "why do muslims murder americans" dated july 7, 2010.

and excerpt:

the nation of islam murdered "infidels" who left the movement or criticized elijah muhammad. some were stunningly brutal, the murder of an entire family in philadelphia, including drowning two infants<. but the worst was yet to come. unlike the son of sam or the zodiac killer, the zebra murders ,which took place in san francisco in 1973 have been generally forgotten... because they are politically incorrect.

the full number of those murdered by the "death angels" of the nation of islam may never be known. estimates range anywhere from 71 to over 200. those targeted were children as young as 11 year old michele denise carrasco and as old as 81-year-old janitor ilario bertuccio. salvation army cadets, college students, a retired coast guardsman. the victims were shot, mutilated, raped or decapitated. some were so badly mutilated that their identities have never been learned. the killers were nation of islam members and in some cases used NOI businesses to carry out their atrocities. their defense was paid for by the nation of islam. the horrifying crimes had been committed because the black muslim perpetrators believed that murder was their "ticket to heaven".

the zebra murders were the worst acts of muslim terrorism perpetrated on u.s. soil, until september 11, 2001. like virtually every muslim atrocity, they have been swept under the rug, their memory scrubbed away and banished to the dusty archives. because it is much easier to claim that muslims began murdering americans in 1968 because they were angry over israel-- than to admit the ugly and unpleasant truth.

pretty powerful stuff, pretty good writing, by anyone's standards.

john jay @ 07.16.2010

p.s. my collected posts on the right of individual americans to exercise defense of self against islamic attack, and the death of innocence. i like to think they are not bad, either.

she's at it again, and just as on target, in her wry little way. though she doesn't mention me, but, i think that she can be forgiven that little omission.

an excerpt:

4. And in the West, the sons of Allah recruit helpers, who are traitors, and they are called "Quislings", for with honeyed words do they seduce the gullible and weak minded and the politicians, saying, "Peace, peace, Islam is peace!" And for the betrayal of their countrymen, they are paid their 30 pieces.

5. And lo, these are they, who speak for Allah and his cursèd prophet: The teacher, the politician and weak willed women who allay the rational fears of sane folk, and conspire they with the Manipulators of Perception, who say, "Believest thou not what thine eye hath seen, nor what thine ear hath heard, for they do lie. Believest thou our words, instead."

it is wry, it is funny, and it is so worth the read, as the writing sparkles. and, it is so true.